Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (3)
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3)
Keywords
- Personality (3) (remove)
Institute
Research on narcissism continues to develop at a rapid pace. Yet, researchers from different disciplines are still divided over whether narcissists are good versus bad leaders. On the one hand, narcissists' bright qualities (e.g., charisma) are associated with positive outcomes at different levels of analysis from subordinates, to peers, and the organization as a whole. On the other hand, however, narcissists' dark qualities (e.g., entitlement) are associated with a number of counterproductive work behaviors, causing organizations to falter. The present article adds to and extends the traditional good-versus-bad debate about narcissistic leadership and pursues three goals: (a) to critically review the literature on narcissistic leaders and their behaviors in the workplace, (b) to provide tangible recommendations for how to best assess, select, and develop narcissistic leaders, and (c) to highlight future directions and ongoing challenges ahead in the field of narcissistic leadership.
Communal narcissism can be defined as grandiose self-views in the communal domain. Within the literature, two forms of communal narcissism, normal and pathological, can be distinguished. However, no study to date has investigated their convergence and divergence. Using a large community sample (N = 781), the current study aimed to fill this gap through examination of 1) the distinctiveness of normal and pathological communal narcissism; 2) their relationship to broad personality characteristics; and 3) values. Results suggest that 1) normal and pathological communal narcissism are structurally distinct constructs; 2) the difference in relation to personality characteristics is limited to neuroticism; and 3) they share the values of self-enhancement and self transcendence.